It's Time for Holder to Go

That's right:  The die-hard, proud liberal is calling for the resignation--and if no resignation is forthcoming, the termination--of the job of Attorney General Eric Holder.

It's not because of the "Fast and Furious" program, which was had its genesis in the Bush administration (a nearly identical program which allowed illegal gun sales to transpire called "Operation Wide Receiver" took place from 2006-2007), which, whilel frought with execution problems was a well-intentioned attempt to reduce illegal gun trade.  In fact, I think it's sad and ironic that many of those who are railing against the "Fast and Furious" operation are those who also clamor for enforcement of existing gun laws instead of the imposition of new laws (a ridiculous argument that presumes the two are mutually exclusive or that new law would not address problems NOT covered under current, extraordinarily weak, gun control measures).

Nor should he lose his job for the UAV/Drone killings of American citizens--a travesty of justice, for sure, which is counter to everything we stand for as Americans--but which appears to be the trend in "terrorism justice," which existed before Holder and will continue to exist after him until the Supreme Court has an epiphany and starts doing its job: protecting the integrity of the constitution.  Given the decisions its made regarding Americans United, Gun Control, and others, this is something the Roberts court seems incapable of doing.

No, where Holder himself has crossed the line from dedicated if misguided Attorney General to megalomaniac who has no regard for the basic tenets of American Democracy is in the seizure of Associated Press, Fox News and other media email and phone records.

The basic story is this: reporters from these news organizations (and I do use "news" loosely when it comes to Fox News) filed reports which contained information available in classified government reports. In its efforts to track the leak, Holder approved the wiretap of and record seizure of more than twenty office, cell and home phone lines of reporters for a two month period. 

The reason given was the now ubiquitous "National Security."

There was a reason that the founding fathers guaranteed the freedom of the press as the very first amendment to the constitution.  The media-along with every day citizens - have the right to investigate their government and speak publicly about their findings.  While there may be a moral responsibility to do so ethically, there is no statutory requirement which would prevent a news outlet from reporting information learned during its investigations.  It is a longstanding and long-defended tradition (with a notable lapse under the previous administration) that the media can protect its anonymous sources of information, and is in fact critical to the proper oversight function of a robust and free media.

While the media may have a responsibility to report ethically, the government has a constitutional mandate to not only allow the medial to report its information, but to defend and support it in its mission to do so.  In approving the illegal record seizures, Holder has made the determination that under the ridiculous guise of "National Security," the government can undertake a coordinated effort of intimidation and disregard for the first Amendment.

As the chief legal officer of the United States, Holder has acted in direct opposition to the very basis for the existence of his domain.  As such, he is no longer qualified to execute the office to which he has been appointed, and must no longer be allowed to carry it out.